no the reason they were beaten because they weren't adaptable, according to the assistant captain and the assistant coach. they kept trying to do what the had practiced to perfection in training, no matter what, even though it wasn't working, and got even more frustrated and tried harder to do it. LOL

Who needs to be adaptive? I can't take what the coaches say as the facts may differ from the media friendly reply to the masses.

Coaches will devise gameplay and set pieces, if things dont go to plan, do they have another plan? Richie is the coach during the 80 minutes. So, did the coaches fall short on ideas, or did Richie fall short in adapting to these in-game, or did the players not play with their standard skill level and deliver? Hard to know, maybe it will turn up in a book one day. Our game is well known, we are predictable, others watch what we do and devise counter measures, we need to be a step ahead of that.

Logically that doesn't stand true. We are largely unbeaten. If we were THAT predictable, we would be being beaten week in and week out.

and more recently, anyone who played the Highlanders in the SUper knockout phase

Chiefs played unpredictable Rugby for a few seasons, it was chaos on field, and they won a couple of titles, but eventually, you get caught out with it. The Highlanders we probably a little lucky, and they struggled somewhat with teams that played VERY structured rugby. I can't recall which teams off the top of my head.

The Highlanders we probably a little lucky, and they struggled somewhat with teams that played VERY structured rugby. I can't recall which teams off the top of my head.

They were the best team in the competition, second most consistent. What a bizaare statement to make, luck had nothing to do with it. Of course you need to adapt your gameplan. If you are a team capable of doing it mid-game you are a great team. Your approach to rugby is very linear (much like AE's box kick), in a game that requires dynamic thinking. This is after all professional rugby, not an under 13's comp.

If you are losing and doing the same thing repeatedly it would be fair to assume, continue doing it and the result will be the same (losing). Any team that plays rugby that is "unpredictable" has an advantage in that they require their opposition to dynamicly adapt in combating them.

The Highlanders we probably a little lucky, and they struggled somewhat with teams that played VERY structured rugby. I can't recall which teams off the top of my head.

They were the best team in the competition, second most consistent. What a bizaare statement to make, luck had nothing to do with it. Of course you need to adapt your gameplan. If you are a team capable of doing it mid-game you are a great team. Your approach to rugby is very linear (much like AA's box kick), in a game that requires dynamic thinking. This is after all professional rugby, not an under 13's comp.

If you are losing and doing the same thing repeatedly it would be fair to assume, continue doing it and the result will be the same (losing). Any team that plays rugby that is "unpredictable" has an advantage in that they require their opposition to dynamicly adapt in combating them.

Key word: Dynamic - its essential in the modern game

I have criticized AE's Box kick all season long!

You don't feel the Highlanders game was a little helter skelter?

Are you confident of them getting a second successive title next year if they play the same type of Rugby?

Don't get me wrong, they deserved the title, but I disagree they were the best team in the competition (Excepting the fact they won the title), I felt that the Hurricanes played the best all season and fell over at the final hurdle to a superior Highlanders side on the night. I believe if the Hurricanes had showed up and played their best Rugby on the night the result would have been close but the Hurricanes would have had the title. I say this even though I was supporting the Highlanders in that game.

I don't believe that if the AB's played the way the Highlanders did, that they would have near the win/loss ratio they enjoy right now.

I am really surprised at the seeming widespread panic of one loss in this forum.

I agree about adapting the gameplan, I'd have liked to have seen it in the french quarterfinal we won, however, with the Win Loss record they hold, what they do largely works for them clearly. If you believe they are lucky (all sport has an element of it, then you'll probably like the phrase, "It's funny, the harder I work, the luckier I get".

I am not overly surprised at the selection for this weeks team, especially not surprised that the front row remains intact. They will have been read the riot act, and I expect a BIG game from those guys this week, they certainly are capable. I'd even suggest their RWC spots will be on the line if they don't.Vito for Kaino is interesting...

I'm expecting a decent game from Whitelock, it's time he fired up, he has been quiet all year, even for the Crusaders.

There is a HUGE amount to play for this week, I hope they step up for it. I am pretty confident they will.

no the reason they were beaten because they weren't adaptable, according to the assistant captain and the assistant coach. they kept trying to do what the had practiced to perfection in training, no matter what, even though it wasn't working, and got even more frustrated and tried harder to do it. LOL

Who needs to be adaptive? I can't take what the coaches say as the facts may differ from the media friendly reply to the masses.

Coaches will devise gameplay and set pieces, if things dont go to plan, do they have another plan? Richie is the coach during the 80 minutes. So, did the coaches fall short on ideas, or did Richie fall short in adapting to these in-game, or did the players not play with their standard skill level and deliver? Hard to know, maybe it will turn up in a book one day. Our game is well known, we are predictable, others watch what we do and devise counter measures, we need to be a step ahead of that.

Logically that doesn't stand true. We are largely unbeaten. If we were THAT predictable, we would be being beaten week in and week out.

Being predictable doesnt mean you get beaten week in and week out. Like any sport, its not just about skill, or tactics, or holding your nerve. Its all og those. If you are predictable, that will narrow the scoreline. If you rely on skill, and yes we are the best, allowing others to play to the predictabilty will help them. Scorelines this last few games haven't been great, they could have been better if we kept our in game play less predictable. therefore less prone to having some plays nullified, and less prone to not taking the time off the other side.

no the reason they were beaten because they weren't adaptable, according to the assistant captain and the assistant coach. they kept trying to do what the had practiced to perfection in training, no matter what, even though it wasn't working, and got even more frustrated and tried harder to do it. LOL

Who needs to be adaptive? I can't take what the coaches say as the facts may differ from the media friendly reply to the masses.

Coaches will devise gameplay and set pieces, if things dont go to plan, do they have another plan? Richie is the coach during the 80 minutes. So, did the coaches fall short on ideas, or did Richie fall short in adapting to these in-game, or did the players not play with their standard skill level and deliver? Hard to know, maybe it will turn up in a book one day. Our game is well known, we are predictable, others watch what we do and devise counter measures, we need to be a step ahead of that.

Logically that doesn't stand true. We are largely unbeaten. If we were THAT predictable, we would be being beaten week in and week out.

Being predictable doesnt mean you get beaten week in and week out. Like any sport, its not just about skill, or tactics, or holding your nerve. Its all og those. If you are predictable, that will narrow the scoreline. If you rely on skill, and yes we are the best, allowing others to play to the predictabilty will help them. Scorelines this last few games haven't been great, they could have been better if we kept our in game play less predictable. therefore less prone to having some plays nullified, and less prone to not taking the time off the other side.

You may be right, I guess time will tell somewhat. I think our skills and finishing have let us down, our forwards have been lazy and this has meant we haven't had the turn overs we have enjoyed in the past, which combined with incredibly fast delivery from our 9 and the talent of our backline hasn't been able to fire properly either.

I don't think there is too much wrong with our plan, it's our execution that is the problem for my money. Being a little unpredictable may play a part in our success going forward.

I'd also really like to see us capitalize on our opponents yellow cards more.

no the reason they were beaten because they weren't adaptable, according to the assistant captain and the assistant coach. they kept trying to do what the had practiced to perfection in training, no matter what, even though it wasn't working, and got even more frustrated and tried harder to do it. LOL

Who needs to be adaptive? I can't take what the coaches say as the facts may differ from the media friendly reply to the masses.

Coaches will devise gameplay and set pieces, if things dont go to plan, do they have another plan? Richie is the coach during the 80 minutes. So, did the coaches fall short on ideas, or did Richie fall short in adapting to these in-game, or did the players not play with their standard skill level and deliver? Hard to know, maybe it will turn up in a book one day. Our game is well known, we are predictable, others watch what we do and devise counter measures, we need to be a step ahead of that.

Logically that doesn't stand true. We are largely unbeaten. If we were THAT predictable, we would be being beaten week in and week out.

Being predictable doesnt mean you get beaten week in and week out. Like any sport, its not just about skill, or tactics, or holding your nerve. Its all og those. If you are predictable, that will narrow the scoreline. If you rely on skill, and yes we are the best, allowing others to play to the predictabilty will help them. Scorelines this last few games haven't been great, they could have been better if we kept our in game play less predictable. therefore less prone to having some plays nullified, and less prone to not taking the time off the other side.

You may be right, I guess time will tell somewhat. I think our skills and finishing have let us down, our forwards have been lazy and this has meant we haven't had the turn overs we have enjoyed in the past, which combined with incredibly fast delivery from our 9 and the talent of our backline hasn't been able to fire properly either.

I don't think there is too much wrong with our plan, it's our execution that is the problem for my money. Being a little unpredictable may play a part in our success going forward.

I'd also really like to see us capitalize on our opponents yellow cards more.

Im still at a loss as to how our skill was down for most of the team. One or two have a bad game or a few uncharacteristic errors, but most? Is the opinion that Oz shut us down enough causing us to rush? Or panic? Can we respond tactily? I can't see us all having a bad day at the office. I hope the Brains Trust is putting together some tricks and surprises

Im still at a loss as to how our skill was down for most of the team. One or two have a bad game or a few uncharacteristic errors, but most? Is the opinion that Oz shut us down enough causing us to rush? Or panic? Can we respond tactily? I can't see us all having a bad day at the office. I hope the Brains Trust is putting together some tricks and surprises

Reality is that if a few key players have an off night, it creates pressure on other players which can cause errors in skills and decision making. It's a chain reaction. It's why it's so often talked about that the game starts with the forwards.

The All Blacks vs Wallabies match reminded me of the Super Rugby final. I look at the ABs as the equivalent of the Hurricanes and Wallabies as the equivalent of the Highlanders. The better team on paper was outplayed by the actual winner but it could easily have gone the other way. There were many moments were a slight change in the game play could have swung the game the other way. In the end I didn't see much difference between the two teams. So last week the All Blacks could have won even they made many more errors. It has happened for the All Blacks at least a few times over the last four or five years.

Hammerer: The All Blacks vs Wallabies match reminded me of the Super Rugby final. I look at the ABs as the equivalent of the Hurricanes and Wallabies as the equivalent of the Highlanders. The better team on paper was outplayed by the actual winner but it could easily have gone the other way. There were many moments were a slight change in the game play could have swung the game the other way. In the end I didn't see much difference between the two teams. So last week the All Blacks could have won even they made many more errors. It has happened for the All Blacks at least a few times over the last four or five years.